


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0D0Q5D7flDb4 



? . . . <^ 



V 






V 



.■4? .-i^:-. 















'•'■ 




























<w 






4 o. 




y o 



• *bV* 



^ *o*o> of O *.,,. .0 V * To' -^ 






o 









>+# 



•>\ 



J> 









MR. TAGGAHT'S 

ADDRESS TO HIS CONSTITUENTS* 

O.V THE SUBJECT OF I MP R E S S M EJVTS. 



To the Citizens of Massachusetts, particularly of the district 
-ichi'ck I have Ike honor lo represent. 

FELLOW CITIZENS-* 

I\ a situation of the country different finer* the pre* 
sent, T should not have given either you op myself the trouble 
of this address. But in the present season of peril, involved 
as we are in a war which, how far it way prove ruinous lo 
our best interests as a nation it is impossible, at tins time, to 
foresee, standing as I do in that public station in which y out 1 
partiality has repeatedly placed me, 1 thought it a duty to 
present you with a few observations on the state of the na- 
tion. It is well known that I leave uniformly opposed the 
present war. as well as all those previous steps which have 
led to it. Whatever was either the nature or extent of the 
injuries we had received from the different belligerents, t 
viewed them as growing out of the insect war in Europe! 
a war probably both in its extent and in (he great events and 
important eousecjuenees of which it !.a* been productive, un- 
paralleled in modern limes, and that these injuries Would 
cease of course, on the return of peace. Our neutral situa- 
tion gave us many advantages, ami. although we suffered 
some patii;il inconveniences from the mutual encroachments 
of (lie different belligerents, I considered it much better la 
hear with those partial and temporary evils, than to rush into 
a conflict of which we could calculate neither the extent, 
the consequences to our independence' and liberties, nor the 
duration. My present intention is not to enter on an Investi- 
gation oT, cither the justice or policy of the present war. or 
to indulge in conjectures about its probable issue. Some of 
my ideas on this subject, submitted at the close of the last 
session, are now before the public. How far these conjec- 
tures have been verified by facts, is obvious to those who have 
paid particular attention to the passing events of the last 
campaign. My observations will bt confined to one single 
point, viz. the impressment of seamen, every other matte? 
in dispute between the two nations being, in the view of the 
President; so far removed ->ut of the wag as lo oppose no in- 



:irs 



fermentable obstacle to a, ******* ^JM"* ' ™ oeTres. 
ftl.ni the messaee ami documents communicated to oougreaa 
from tne im *k ^.^; n It ia-not mV intention 

tt t the commencement o. Hie aeasion. i i '.,,.„.„ ir 
J„ .indicate foe British practice .fimp.-ess.nK - ■ m K 
#l,..i c-n he done, it •< »»« "Oameas ,,f ,, ' et,, who '" 
KtosiTof Ihe praetiee asil is, at least so far as the 
I tedsJte are affected hy it. nought to estenuate.and 
S «h to et doun in malice, it is a vulgar error .ndua- 

Kdy*ir^ 

r.;..i,f nf imnresains Ameru-an citizens. She claims no 
J$ ,'»nd hT. t«ri»b. y pr.fe,.ed . «iili^- « «*£ 
Sebof thai character as ma, have been Jmpr^ssea, o» M- 
', iti B proof <>f '!•"•»• citizenship. She claims the righl of 
&3nTaad impressing hep .a a seamen, wbrn loom « 
t rd of n eotU merchanl ships. The controversy on b» 
^ ', ,'., netwre. the two V»~^»%Xfi£££ 
grinmscrihed within mrj narrow limit*. The Umted Jbtttep 
-,v the* don't wanl <» protect or claim r»iili»li seamen in 
g i ,.,.'■ ,'. Great Britain »,. .be waot.no *"****• 
u onl'v th se who are her awn .abject.. One would nata- 

$ ,. SSS. <o .„ anuertl. "H^**ft£?lE"fc! 

mTertheformerdynasty, the seaman *ho, evenina time of 
I ... ahould abandon the service of hia country mrihm* 
EZ and ensaRe in the employment of a foreign merchant, 

EHi;;it:::":::;;i:;;::::;:-;~r : =s : 

jngtoine ' .. fc m „.,.<.„ fiye year, r. - 



sufficient length of time to become citizens, and afterward,? 
betake themselves to the sea for an employment. 

li is therefore a mistaken idea that this practice is either 
novel or peculiar to Great Britain. The regulations of France, 
we hare seen to be peculiarly severe on (tie subject, as appears* 
from several edicts issued from time to time, from the year 
165U. if not from periods still more early, (town to the era 
of the republic. The same practice has been recognised by 
Standing regulations of Great Britain, at least as far hack as 
the year 1640. Authorities to that effect have been recently 
laid he fore the public, a citation of which would protract 
these remarks beyond their intended limits. During the pre* 
sent war in iMirope, this practice has been probably, more 
common than in any former period. The reason, without 
doubt, is that during this period, a greater number of Bri* 
tish seamen have found means to shelter themselves under a 
neutral Hag. This was the first time in which it affected the 
United States as an independent nation. That they have been 
nine affected by it than any other nation has arisen from 
their speaking the same language, and from such a similarity 
of manners and customs, more striking perhaps among sea- 
faring people, than among those of any other description aE 
renders it almost impossible t*> discriminate. Had either 
France or Spain been the neutral which was carrying on a 
lucrative commerce, the English sailor could not have taken 
refuge on board their ships, without hi ingj liable to almost in- 
stant detection. Hut on hoard of an American ship it is al- 
most impossible to distinguish him from one of oar native sea- 
men. It is natural tor a seaman to prefer peace to war, the 
quiet pursuits of commerce on hoard of a neutral, to the dan* 
gers incident to the service on hoard a ship of the line or a 
frigate This preference given to the service, connected with 
that flourishing state of (he American commerce, which ena- 
bled the merchant to give such high wages to seamen, held 
out such powerful inducements to British sailors, as prevailed 
upon vast numbers to abandon their country and to seek employ* 
inent on hoard of American ships. For several years pre- 
vious to our adoption of the restrictive system, which gave a 
check to commercial enterprise! the number of foreign sea- 
men, principally British, who have been in the American em- 
ploy, have been computed to average not less than £0,000. 
It cannot lie denied that the withdrawing of so large a num- 
ber of a class of people, necessary in the present situation of 
the country to her wvy existence as an independent nation, 
was such a serious injury to Great Britain as, if continued) 
must greatly diminish her power, lessen her security] and even 
put her safety at hazard j au evil which probably there is no 



nation in the world which, situated r>c she i<5. would nr,f . | r 
some measures to prevent. H J therefore 1 he question should 
be asked why she resorted to the practice of impressing sea- 
men from on board our ships, (he answer is a plain one. It 
i? because thousands of her seafaring subjects are on hoard 
of our vessels, to her manifest injury and damage, sheltered 
Under American protections, and, for I hat reason, claimed 
n* American citizens ; and (here is no arrangement whereby 
& 1 1 < - can reclaim them in any other way. I do not mention 
this to just if) the practice of impressment, but to show what 
that practice is, and what Ir.is given rise toil It is imprac- 
ticable from any documents within my reach, to ascertain the 
number of seamen who have been actually impressed from on 
board of American ships, since the commencement of the 
present war in Europe, and, could that difficulty be removed, 
it still greater would arise, in determining what proportion of 
these are bona fide Americans. Various circumstances how- 
aver, have induced me to believe that the number, particu- 
larly of real Americans, has been by far overrated. Asa get 
peral rule the apparent magnitude of objects increases 
you approach them, and diminishes in proportion as the dis- 
tance from them is increased. The subject of impressment 
Las a different effect upon the optics. Viewed at a distance it 
appears to t,c an object of vast magnitude hui diminishes in 
proportion as yon approach it. A natural and obvious enquiry 
is to what pails or sections of the United States do these 
multitudes of seamen belong? Where are their friends, con- 
nections and families, from which they have been torn, and 
for which bo much sympathy has been expressed? We cannot 
expect to find them in Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, or any 
where west of the Allegany. We will naturally expect to 
find them in the seaports, in places where there is the most 
commerce and navigation. IJut do we find those numerous 
distressed families and connections there ? Enquire of the lit st 
Informed men in those plaees, where you would naturallj c\ 
pert to hear the greatest complaints, and you can hardly ob- 
tain information of half a doaen, w here the proportion of the 
estimated number n ould he ;it least 1000. This circumstance 
ahme, affords strong presumptive evidence at least, if not 
conclusive proof, that a great majority of these impressed 
seamen are foreigners, who, when they arrive in the country 
excite little interest, and when they are withdrawn, either by 
impressment or otherwise, leave no vacuum. One of the 
first things to be expected in an application for the discharge 
of a teal American seaman, would he a statement, authenti- 
cated i»y proper testimony, of the pal t of the country to which 
lie belonged, particularly the place oi his birth, where lie was 



best known, and where bis connections, if be had nnr. resided. 
Such a statement, properly authenticated, especially when 
found toooineWe with the narrative ofthe party himself, who 
claimed the release, would be one of The strongest evidences 
of his heing an American. There arc few if any instances, 
of applications made in this way, which have proved unsuc- 
cessful. How far this has been attended to in sireb applica- 
tions « ill he seen as we proceed in the examination of the do- 
cuments. The evidence principally relied on an proof, that 
a seaman is an American, is a protection, a document granted 
in the first instance by a collector of one. of the ports, a nota- 
ry publie, or a consul, or vice consul in a foreign poet. The 
loose manner in which these protections are, in the first in- 
stanee granted, tlie extensive forgeries of these papers, which 
is known to he practised, and is neither restrained or punished 
by any law, and the common practice of buying, selling, 
and bartering them among sailors, has rendered them docu- 
ments on which very little reliance is to be placed. A man 
or it may he a dozen men at a time, apply lo a collectors of- 
fice for protections, as American sailors, professing themselves 
to be citizens of the United States. Another man equally 
unknown comes forward and swears to the whole dozen, or 
whatever is the number, it may he, in (he expectation ofa si- 
milar return, while, as is probably the case at times, both 
applicants, and witnesses, have, within a few short months, 
it may be weeks or even days, lauded for the first time on our 
shores. The forms of law being in this way complied wiih, 
a protection is granted as a matter of course. Where is the 
court of law which would award a plantiffa single dollar on 
no better evidence than this? Several perjuries of t):i» kind 
have been detected, and there exists but little doubt but ma- 
ny more have been committed. It is to be lamented that 
such is the state of morals in oin* own as well as other coun- 
tries, that oaths, particularly ofa certain kind, are hut little 
regarded. The smuggler who would neither swear away the 
life nor property of another in a court of justice, wills many 
times, bestitate but little, to defraud -the revenue, by shear- 
ing falsely in a custom house, it is I believe an incontesli- 
ble fact, that the o.iths prescribed by law for toe purpose of 
obtaining protections, are frequently but little regarded a- 
mong sailors. When perjuries of this kind are detected there 
exists no law either of the United States or of the individual 
slates to punish them. This has been attempted in some of 
the states without effect. When therefore these protections 
are relied on as the principal evidence of citizenship, and 
when it is a matter of public notoriety that European sailors 
are furnished with these documents, luUiaeiimiualely with 



oip Native seamen, and flip protection" themselves are fre- 
er (fitly mere matters of bargain and sal*- among sailors, it 
affords very «troni^ presumptive evidence at least, that a great 
proportion of these impressed seamen, although furnished 
with American protections, are hi reality foreigners : ;it least 
it is n<»t strange that little credit should be attached t<> them 
by the British government. And as neither a hoarding officer 
from a ship of war, or a press q;in^ are \i k iy nice in making 
distinctions] it is not Btrange if an American shonld be some* 
times impressed, instead of an European. But it is Ume 'o 
proceed to an examination of the documents. 1 am sens 
that the subject is a dry one; it is only the importance of 
the facts that will afford any adequate compensation for the 
(1 of the details. Bat as they are partieularlj interest* 
iftg at this time, on account of (lie present situation of the 
court try, 1 hope this will he a sufficient inducement to give 
tiiem a candid and impartial examination, although hut little 
pleasure should he derived from the perusal. 

1 have not deemed it necessary to lie very partieaiar in the 
ev. agination of any documents en the subject, of an older 
date than thai communicated January 19, 1805. Indeed I 
hswe hern able to lay my hands on hut one of an older date, 
hat is a report from the department of state, eommuni- 
■ March 11, iri'S, which I have given somewhat of an 
attentive perusal. But it gives no satisfactory information 
of she number which had been impressed ;i( that time. The 
first Uem contained in it consists of the protests of M differ- 
ent sea captains relative to impressments from vessels under 
tbc'rv command*, to the number of 79 seamen, of these 35 are 
said to he Americans : 23 unknown to what nation they l»e- 
I d ; 9 British subjects, and the residue of different foreign 
nations. t)nh It? were said to be furnished with protections, 
about an equal number without protections, and a majoritj of 
the whole not known whether the} had or had not pn 
tions. Nine of the number were impressed bj French Jes- 
se's. A second item contains the returns pf the collectors 
of the several ports, hut principally from those ol Neu fork 
aid Philadelphia* vr& 60 by the collector of Philadelphia, 
120 by Mr. Lamb and Mr. bands, collectors in succession of 
the port of Kew York, and 1! from other collectors. In the 
returns of the collector af Philadelphia, onlj it are stated 
to be American* itizens, and the remainder pail British, pi it 
of several neutral nations, such as Swedes, Danes, French- 
, Dutchmen and Prussians, and pari unknown. Besides 
esc, men ■ tde of tuo vessels, one captured by the 

French, and id r hy the English, in v I all the hands 

were taken nut. Of the 120 relumed by the successive col- 



lectors of New York, V8 are suit! to be \morienns 90 to be 
British s injects, and the remainder either unknown, or of 
different European nations. Some of these were detained 
only a few <i>»ys ; 28 of tlie impressments were h- ' r< neh ves- 
sels. Of tlie 11 returned by the other collectors. > were ^;id 
to lie Englishmen, ."> to he detained only three days, the re- 
mniirrfer n« remarks. Pf. B These returns of the coHeetoro 
includes t lie principal part of the same eases contained in the 
protests of the captains, In the years 179tJ~'J7 a large Bri- 
tish fleet I iv i'i the West Indies, and, lorn time, impressr 
merits were frequent in that quarter. But the interposition 
of Mr*. Talbot, agent for the relief of American seamen, and 
Mr. Craig, his assistant, 103 seamen were discharged, :id 
the practice of impressment in that quarter, ma great mea- 
sure stopped. How great a number was left, was probably 
unknown. Of the real Americans, the number seems not fo 
have been great. I find also two lists of applications which 
had been transferred to agents in London, amounting together 
to VOL For one of which application had been made for 
their release by Mr. Pinkney, and the other by Mr. King, 
successive ministers at London. The business was transfer- 
red to Mr. Lenox, agent for the relief of prisoners, who 
states that a number, he neither states their names, nor how 
many, had been released prior to his application, and from 
the same name occurring several times, he was uncertain 
whether they were the names of the same or of different in- 
dividuals. The result of Mr. Lenox's application is not 
staled, nor how many had been before liberated on tho appli- 
cation of Messrs. Pinkney and King. But it follows, thai 
this number ;•<>!, deducting therefrom the number rele 
prior to Mr. Lenox's application, and those released o 
application, contain a list of all the eases then known to the 
agent at London. It is impossible from this document to 
come at any thing like nu exact result. Nor is it material 
towards making an estimate of the number who may be de- 
tained at this time. Because whatever that number might 
br, so far as it was known, it was brought forward, and the 
names included in succeeding applications. The only point 
of view in which it w mid be important, would be toaseei 
ti»e number whieh bad been discharged prior to th.it »>•■■ 

As the document of January t9, isj.t, begins, us H were, 
a new era on the subject, as it is the ;"ii^< which attempts any 
thing like .i 1 i^t of i npressments; and, together with subse- 
quent documents, comprises <A\ the information to be obtain- 
ed. I have examined them with a considerable degree of 
attention, and drawn such eouciusiuus a> appeared to me 
fairly to follow. 



This report nas made to congress January 19. 1805, niir* 
guant to a resolution of the house of representatives of' ilic 
iOth of tlie preceding November. The first item consists of 
a list of the names of 218 Beamcn ( for whose release appli- 
cation had been made, in the first instance to the department 
of state. So far as these instances have anj date, they ex- 
tend from January 1»t, 1798 lo October li, li>0i ■; 79 have a 
date assigned, 139 without date. 

The second item contains a list of 1538 cases in which ap- 
plication had been made to the board of admiraliy. for the 
release of seamen b y George W. Irvine, Esq. United Stales 
agent .it London. These applications were made between the 
beginning of March 1803, anil Hie latter end of August 1804. 
Of these applications the result is given. This is the com- 
mencement of that number, which has, from time to time, 
accumulated to 6257, of a number which has been bo often print- 
ed iii staring capitals for the purpose of creating an excite- 
nient. and to impress the public with the beliel that this num- 
ber at least, of real Americans was at this moment forcibly 
detained on board the British fleet I have noi examined 
particularly whether all, or what proportion of (lie preced- 
ing number of 218 is included in this li^t of 1588. Some of 
them undoubtedly are. and by comparingdates.a great propor- 
tion of them may be so included. It is however perfectly im- 
material tothe present enquiry, whether they are or are not 
so included, because ail the names so reported are either con- 
tained in this or in some later list of applications, as a matter 
of course. Posterior fo Mr. Talbot's agencj in the West Ins 
dies, during the year 1797, although consular agents in Jamai- 
ca, reported certain cases of impressment to the department 
of state, yet with i lie exception <;!' live instances of i .-- 
charge, made bj the commandii g officers of the Jamaica 
station, as soon as be became acquainted with the circum- 
stances, we find no mention made of any discharged, only 
such as Mere through the instrumentality of the agent at 
London. These applications, whether made in the first in- 
stance to the department of stale, or by friends at home com- 
municated to thai department, or made to consuls or vice, 
consuls in foreign ports, by either the parties, their friends, 
or the captains of the ships from whence taken, were, in the 
last resort, transmitted to the agent in London, and through 
him, application was made in behalf of his government, io 
thatof Great Britain. The idea of swelling the number of 
impressments, bj representing the lists contained in these do- 
cuments as the mere returns of one agent, and reasoning in 
this way that if the returns of a single agent amount to (!000 
and upwuid; how great must be llic amount of the whole; 



Ins no foundation* in f:»ot. By adopting thi* mode of rea- 
ioning, And muHiptyint" impressments in this way, we may 
in -cease the amount to 20.000, or to any number of tlwn- 
lands on which a fertile imagination may elioose to fix. The 
truth is thai iKe agent at London was the sole agent in this 
b ^iicss. To his oflfee (he principal part of the applications 
w~ere transmitted in the first instance, and those originally 
fnade at other places were transmitted there iri lite last re* 
sort, and we have no evidence thai information has been re- 
ceived by any department, of the impressment ofasinglc in- 
dividual whose name is hot included in sonic of these lists. 

Tlicse 1538 applications arc not to'he considered as a state- 
ment of the precise aumher of impressments of which infof- 
ln -tiori had been obtained. It relates to the number of a . i- 
cations made at different times, and is mad out in this way. 
Application is made at a particular time for the release of a 
certain n Umber of seamen whose names are mentioned. A 
part oT i lie number is discharged or ordered to be discharged, 
and the release of the remainder; for certain reasons either 
del; v I Or refused. The application is renewed and their 
frames' again presented a second, and it maj he a third or 
fourth time, connected with a number of new applications. 
This course is continued until a release is either obtained or 
the application abandoned. On ever> renewal of the app'i- 
cation the name is reinserted, and this goes' to swell the list. 
For example we find the name of William Brown attached 
to \os. 258, 1037. l2o* — William Bond Nos. ;:s, I f04, 1 143*, 
1205— John Barlow Nos. 11(50. 11S9. 1277, liTo — John Dunn 
Nos. 1289. 1*07, 1500. 1534 — thai these numbers relate to 
the same individual, and not toothers of the same name ap- 
pears from this, that where different individualsof the same 
name occur, a note of distinction, such as 1st, 2d, 3d, Ke. is 
u-ed. There are several Vviiliam Brown* so' distinguished, 
but these numbers are affixed to the same W illiam Brown, and 
so of the others. In the document under consideration wo 
have a list of 1235 names alphabetical!) arranged. Every 
name in the list of 1538 applications is included in that of 
1235. fn 293 instances I find the same person numbered 
ftiore than once, in 63 more than fa ice, in n more than t. ree 
tines and two names occur attached ti> five numbers each. 
]t is i ^possible to ascertain how much the numbers in some 
of the lists are swelled in this way. without more minute at- 
tention than I have leisure to bestow. Prohablj some uf 
them one fourth, or it may be hearty dr quite one third. In 
i 15 instances mention is made of the city or town to which 
tuc person impressed was said to belong, ;.ml in 5^0 other 
oases the state mereljii noticed, lu 520 instances tue time 

B 



io 

of imnressmrnt is mentioned although frequently with no 
mere precision than merely to notice the ye. ; • and in ." t 
•ases notice is taken of the nlaee or particular quarter of 
the world in which it happened. In something rooi ll i one 
half of the eases no mention whatever is made of t?i? | «. 
to which the parties belonged; in a fraction more than < ne 
third either the day, month or year of i; 'is 

mentioned, and in something less than one fourth, noti • is 
taken of the place In those eases where the place i len- 
tioned there occur comparatively but a fewinstanc< in which 
it could have been prevented, had even the broad principle 
of the flag protecting all who sail under it been adopted. Of 
the whole number 344, not more than 8 or to were impres- 
sed at sea, or while in the immediate prosecution of their voy- 
age. Including those impressed in the channel and in sevi ral 
coves, roads, rivers, and harbours, the number was about 50, 
of the remainder 93 were impressed at London, 54 at Liver- 
pool, and of the residue part in other British European 
ports, and part in Jamaica, Barbadoes, and the other West 
India Islands, and in other places from one to two, three, and 
four in a place. In 435 instances the name of the ship from 
which the men were impressed is mentioned. In s«'me in- 
stances two. three and four were taken out of the same ship. 
ll would have been an important piece of information, bad it 
been stated in this, as it is in some other documents, what pro- 
portion of these impressments were from American and what 
from British vessels, because in cases where American sailors 
went voluntarily on hoard of British merchant ships, and were 
impressed fromthem, it could not be complained of as a vi- 
olation of the American flag. As. for the most part, no 
other information is given on this subject, thanmerely to slate 
the name of the ship, I am not sufficiently conversant invo* 
cabularies of this kind to know the national character of a 
ship nerely by its name. Some however are so plainly de- 
signated by their names that their nati mal character cannot 
be mistaken, particularly where they are expressly said to be- 
long to London, Hnll. shields. &c. or designated as Collin*, 
or to have such names as Tippe Soil. British King, Royal I fcar- 
/,>'/,. Thlkt of Kent, Dover Cuttle, &C. I find 42 instances 
of impressments from ships plainly characterised to be Bri- 
tish hv their names, four from French vessels, and five from 
a Prussian. So far as we ean-judg* from other documents 
which I shall presently bring in review, in which the national 
Character of the vessel is particularly mentioned, the pro- 
portion *f impressments from British ships must be much 
greater. An abstract of the result of these applications is 
at» follows. 



11 



Whole number of applications 

CM these are said to be original applications 

Duplicate applications 

Ot these had been discharged or ordered to be discharged 

Nwt on board the ship specified 

On hoard of ships on a foreign station 

Ship on board of which they are snid to be lost 

Ship on board of which they arc said lo be Hot in commission 

Deserted 

Drowned or dead 

Applications unanswered 

'Because they bad no documents 



Because they had voluntarily enlisted 
Refused to be J Because married in Great Britain 
discharged] j Because aHedged to be British subjects 

I Because said to be prisoners of war 
Because they do not appear to have been im« 
^ pressed 



129 

17 

49 

2 



1531 



The documents said to ho insufficient, are of various kinds, 
sin- i as certifie; tes of naturalization, protections from con- 
suls and vice consuls, and notarial affidavits, made either in 
the United States or in Great Britain. To avoid repetition 
in every abstract, I merely state documents insufficient, with- 
out expressing any opinion of their validity, only that they 
are considered as inadequate by the British government. 

In the same report from the department ot.' state, we have 
a communication made by Mr. Savage, consul at Jamaica, of 
8S eases of impressment in the West Indies; 13 of whom 
appear to have had the customary protections j 62 claim tobc 
Americans, and a few who were unfurnished with protections 
;> i to exhibit other proof. I find an afeeeuat of the dis- 

charge of 5 of this number* by the commanding officer on 
the Jamaica station, which, with two others, under different 
circumstances, are the only instances that I have met with of 
discharges in any other way thin through the agent at Lou- 
don, sinee Mr. Talbot's mission to the West Indies in irwr. 
A part of these 88 are included in the grand list of i.Vs ; 
how many I have not ascertained, nor, according to an obser- 
vation already made, is it material. 

The next communication which I find on the subject of im- 
pressments, is a report from the department of state of Match 
6, 1806, pursuant toa resolution of the house of representa- 
tives of January G. preceding. In the let lor which accom- 
panies this report, it is Btated that the aggregate amount of 
impressments, previous to that time, since the commencement 
of the wars in Europe, was 2273, a;;d that it was not easy to 



12 

distinguish with P-rourary, how many of the«r were r ifizens 
of the United .siaivs This report tri \ «• ■* the n nines o( i*.3 
si'innt'ii. siidto have been impressed, but does not furnish the 
Deans of Ascertaining bow man) of this number are oii- 
ginal, and how many only duplicates of former applications. 
All however are included in the total of" 2273. I am nnalile 
to discover from the documents how this number is in. <le 
out. 913 added to 1338. makes an excess of 178; added to 
1.232, the number of original applications, it leaves a defii it 
oi* 128. If we add 5l>3, the only numher which it would 
seem could fairly he added, as that was the sum total of the 
application*, the deficiency will he still greater. That tola! 
must therefore he made out hv the bringing forward of some 
numher not stated in the documents, of which we must he 
contentedly ignorant. The numher 913, is divided in the 
report into the following items : No. 1. contains a statement 
of 503 cases, in which application had been made for a re- 
lease between September 1, 1801. and May 18, 1805. with tho 
result. These are not numbered as in the former document ; 
bo information is given, how many of them arc duplicate ap- 
plications, or included in the preceding report of January !«», 
1803. nor do I possess the means of ascertaining with pre- 
cision the place which they occupy in the -land number of 
6257. No mention is made in the document, either of the 
part of the United Stales to which they belonged, or of tho 
place where they were impressed. In 221 instances the lime 
of impressment is stated. The principal part of these dales 
•re in 1802. 3. V and 5. hut some as early as 179S More 
than half of iheiu are sufficiently early to have been included 
in the last reporA, am! to occupy the place of duplicate ap- 
plications in thin. No abstract is given of the report. I 
bare-taken some pains to collect one from the details, which, 
although possibly it may not he in every punctilio correct, I 
believe contains no very material error. 

Wnolc number 503 

Discharged, or ordered to be discharged i 7 

On board ol ships of foreign stations 3d 

Not found on b aid ol the ships in * hich said to be detained 'it 
Unknown ii. what ship tlicy arc Serving 3 

Deserted ° 

Applications unanswered 58 

f Because they had no documents 1 i2 

J 15 cause 1 eir documents inauffieient 3J 

use British subj-cts, either without or 
v ith spurious protections 43 

I', cause sen* on !• ird foi mutinous <-<,;, ruct 5 
I Because ieleivsecl fiom a Firm I' prison 1 

I \] luse exchiUiged. as an Loutish prisoner of 



13 

f Bcr.-mse thvy appear not to b? Americans Z 

Refused to be J IJ< cause married in Great Bi it.nn I 

oiscliai |jt:d, | Because they had voluntarily entered 38 

[_No reason assigned 6 

503 

No. 2, T s a statement of 3f>3 applications made, in the fust 
instance t» the department of st.itc, am] not before reported 
to the house of representatives, nor included in 'lie returns 
ol' the American agent at London. These are of course in- 
cluded in some other lis! of applications About one hwlf of 
tti est* are dated. Like the former* the dates are principally 
in f 803. 4 and 5. Of these 155 were furnished with protec- 
tions, 102 without protections, of 31 it is not staled whether 
they had or had not protections, 35 appeared to be British 
subjects. 5 claimed to be Americans without exhibiting any 

p !'. (> had lost their protections. 5 had voluntarily enlisted, 

ail IS were composed of Swedes, Portuguese, Prussians, 
Dutch and Danes. 

\o. 3. eont litis a list of 47 cases, reported by the United 
States agent at Jamaica; concerning whom no other remark 
i> made, than that they claimed to be citizens of the United 
Slav's. I h;ne not examined in what list of applications 
either the 363 or the tT are included. 

The next communication in the order of time, on the sub- 
ject of impressments, is a report made to congress, March 
2. 1S0S. in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of 
November 30. 1807. ^s this report was more than three 
months in preparing, satisfactory information may be expect- 
ed. 

No. 1. is untitled a list of impressments from American 
vessels into the British service, between that date and the 
last report made March 5, 180(3. This contains a list of o'li7 
names of impressed seamen, of whom information had been 
received from documents transmitted in the tirst instance to 
the department of stale. It follows as a matter of course, 
that they are included cither in that which follows, or in 
some other application to the British government. Of these 
131 claim to be Americans without producing any proof, Z'J 
are acknowledged to be British subjects, and '22 to be neutral 
aliens; the remaining 315 are said to have produced proof, 
thai they were Americans, i. e. such proof as an American 
protection, managed in the manner in which they are usually 
conducted, is calculated to furnish. In 215 instances tbe im- 
pressments is dated, and in no more than 7b cases is there 
any mention of the pi. ice. it is not meant that these <JJ7 
iiuurossuieuts ail took place between the dales of the dif- 



M 

(ferent reports; for of (he 215 which are dated, S3 took place 
in 1805, a number in 1S03 and 180i, and two in 1798. The 
meaning is. that within these dates information was eommu- 
nioated to the department of state. 

Nos. 2 to 13 inclusive, contain a series of quarterly returns 
of applications, with the result, the first number commencing 
April 10. 1S06. and the last ending with September SO. 1807, 
both inclusive. The total of these returns is 75)8. Separate 
abstracts are given of the result for each quarter. These I 
have condensed into one general abstract of the whole. As 
there are no explicit references to a former application, I 
cannot ascertain what proportion is original and what a con- 
tinuat.ion of former applications. Even the frequent recur- 
rence of the same name, furnishes but a verj equivocal kuid 
of evidence, because distinct individuals, not unfrequently, 
have the same name. By recurring to the dates of these 
impressments however, bo far as anj dale is assigned, umin of 
them "ere sufficiently early to have been contained in a for- 
mer list, and the"observations already made on the report of 
January 1805, are equally applicable to (his. Willi the ex- 
ception of 146 cases, no mention is made of the place of im- 
pressment, and of that number comparatively very few 
happened on the hijjh seas, or where thej could claim the 
protection of the American iiai;; and for an;, thing that 
ars, they either maj oi may not be Americans.—. 
With the greatest number one im; ortant evidence of citizen}- 
eems to he wanting, i. e. notice of the plaee to v hich they 
belonged. In not more than 150 instances is there any men- 
tion made of either the state, city, or town in the United 
Si • -. of which they are said or supposed to he inhabitants. 
And with the exception of about an equal number the im- 
pressment is without date. In 102 instances, mention is made 
of (lie name of the vessel, with a designation of i(s national 
character, h6 of these were American, and it British ves- 
sels. One man was impressed from a French and another 
from a Swedish ship. There is one thing farther in this do- 
cument which 1 find myself unable to explain. In the report 
of January 1805, we find applications for the release of sea- 
men numbered from 1 to 1538. This list begins with No. 
2799 leaving a chasm of 1269. To fill (his chasm 1 can find 
no more (ban 508. The number of applications contained 
in the report of March 0. U 6. leaving a deficit of 757. If 
we add the 863, reported to the. department of slate, and the 
\7 reported by theagent at Jamaica, which on no principle 
of fair reckoning ought to he added. S 4-7 will sti!; be wanting. 
By what form ofproeess the chasm between 1538 and 2799 
owe be tilled up with 503 j the < ••:.!„ number which can fairly 



15 



be added, or even with 9(8. the largest ■amber which plausi- 
ble conjecture ean supply, I am incompetent to explain. My 
fif-i thought wa- thai there roust have been some interme- 
diate communication to congress. I5ut I find, on examina- 
tioo <.'»;i( there i» none This report referringto thai of 1806 
as the last.*— *- An abstract of the resultof these applications 
is as follows. 

\V ole number of applications 
Ot these were original applications 
1) : ilicate applications 
D tchairged or ordered to be discharged 
Not on b >ard of the ships stated 
On board of ships n foreign stations 
Ship not in commission on board of which said ;o be 
Soil) lost on board of which said to be 
Deserted 
Drowned 
Ini lided 
Applications unanswered 

Because they had no documents 

Because their documents were deemeJ insuffi 

cient 
Because they were British subjects 
Because they had voluntarily entered 
Because married in the United Kingdom 
Because natives of the West Indies 
j Because a native of Africa 
Because exchanged as British subjects from 

French and Spanish prisons 
British subjects sent on board lor mutinous con- 
duct 
Because taken out of a French privateer 
Because said to be prisoners ot" « v 
Because taken out of a smuggling vessel 
Because impostor', with fraudulent protections 
B rcaUse he did not wish to quit the service 
Because he was a deserter 
No particular reason ussigned 



Refused to be J 
discharged, 



798 

: : 

35 

272 

56 

48 

2 

1 

8 

2 

121 

33 

117 

44 

40 

7 

2 

I 



3 
1 
8 
I 
12 
1 
I 
1 



798 

The next report made to congress is merely an abstract of 
ihe result of applications for (lie release of 903 seamen. 
This was communicated from the department of state April 
5, 1810, pursuant toa resolution of the House of Represen- 
tatives of the 5th of March. 1 doot know that any thins* 
more than the abstract was communicated. It is as follows. 
Whole number of applh - - j 

O which were original applications 873 

Duplicate applications 

Bistbarged or ordered to be discharged 287 



i6 



Not on board tlie ships as stated SS 

Oil board <>t ships on foreign stations 48 

Stated to be in a ship not in commission 

Rffeircd to the transport boaid 

Deserted 3 

Invalided 2 

D owned 

Applications unanswered 10 

Bee. use they had no dncumpn's I 

I) (iiments said to be instiffii 12 

Said to be natives of England 01 I el nd 9 

Because they had voluntarily enlisted 34 

Because married in England or I-ehnd 7 

Not answering the ucsccptions in ilitir pro- 
tections 44 
Iivpostors with fraudulent prrtec'.ions 11 
Exchanged as prisoners 1 I war 2 
No ground to h. ii> \e them Americans S 

Re j . u I Slid to be destrttis 4 

<-fused to he J _ . , t 

• • . < Because iotall\ ivi orant rl ;i t Luted States 5 

discharged, ; n , . • . . 

Becausi t; ken on boaid privateers 5 

V otectiohs taken fiom tl t m 4 

Because t. ken when defrauding the revenue 2 

Because they had erased protections 2 

Smt on board by masters of vessels for mutii v 3 

Irishmen sent into the service f*r misdemeanors 2 

Because natives of the West Indies 3 

Do. of Afi ica 1 

Do. of Canada 1 

Do. of Hanover 1 



9oJ 



The last communication made to Congress m the subject of im- 
piesunent was the report of Jattuaiy 16, 1812, pursuant to a reso- 
lution of the House of Representatives of November 29 prccedii ir« 
This contains, 1st. alibi of the names of seamen ol whom inf< rma« 
tion had been communicated in the first instance, to ihe depart- 
ment of state, since the date of the Lst report (1 March 2d 1810, 
this list contains 200 names, l r 8 of whom hud produced the cus- 
toms rv proofs of citizenship No date of impressment mi ntiom d. 

2. A detailed report of 1 58 applications in cases of impress* 
ment with the result, in 6 quarterly returns from Mr. Lyman con- 
sul ^t London, beginning April l«t, I8< 9, and ending September 30, 
1810. These, like the former lists, consisted partly of new cases, 
and wa>- in part the continuation offorroei applications', which had 
in the first instance, been unsuccessful. The relative proportion 
of these different kinds ot applications cannat be distinctly ascer- 
tained But as more than 4-5ths of the dates of those which have 
any date assigned ate prior to the year 1810, some as early as 1797 



\1 

and 1798, it may be fairly Inferred that ao inconsiderable number 
of these applications may have been preferred before '.8 9 In 3.9 
casts mention is made of the places to which the parties belonged. 
In about the s mic number, and with only one or two variations the 
s..rnc individuals] the date of t he impressment is noticed, and in 340 
cases, these also of the same individuals, with only a few omissions, 
we are informed of the place, region, or quarter of the world in 
wnich it happened. Of these 340, only 23 are said to have been 
imp esscd at sea, and about 60 more off or near, particular coasts, 
capes, headlands, roads, coves, rivers and barb' urs. and in the 
ehannel. Ol the remainder the greater part are s.ud to be impi i - s- 
ed at London, Liverpool, and other ports in Great B> itain, and in Ja- 
maica and the other West India islands, places where the Ameri- 
can flag could not protect them. In 270 instances, not only the 
name but the national eh trader of rhe ship is given, out ol w bicli 
the v were impressed. It surely never can be pretended that the 
Am rieao flag should protect even our native seamen, when foui.d 
on board foreign, particularly British ships. By adverting to the 
national character of these ships, we find impressments fiom Ame- 
rican ships 158. Biitishdo. 98, French do. 10, Danish 2, Swedish 
2 — The portion of those impressed from British, being to t! ose im- 
pressed from American nearlv 2 to 3 or 2 5»hs, I find reference! 
made to former applications placed against 137 names, that number 
being mentioned more than once, 24 names mentioned more than 
twice, II more than three times, and three as much. ^s 5 tim^s. For 
example Daniel M. Reynold placed against. No 4655 -and referring 
bacl; to Nos. *7:5. '28 6. 3362 ai d 3756. William Smith 9th pli c* 
erl against No. 47 r .6 and refers to Nos 17 26. 2857. 3263. 3755. 
These two individuals seem to have bern on board "I the same •*< ip 
widch was on a foreign station. By means of these repetitions the 
aopa'-ent number exceeds the real one by 176 This list begins with 
N >. 45U0 and ends with 6 57 The 200 applications made in the 
fi st instance to the department of state, added to this total makes 
the s aring number 6257. The number 903 confined in the ab- 
stract of .March 1810, of which there are no details, fills up the 
chasm between the close < f ihe detailed report of April 1808, and 
this of 1812. Six separate absti acts are given of the same number 
of quarterly returns which I have condensed into on* general ab- 
stract of the whole — As follows. 

Whole number 1558 

Duplicate applications 2 

D scharged und ordeicd to be discharged 401 

N »i on board th« ships stated 58 

O i b >ard of snips on foreign stations 14$ 

Snips not ascertained on board of which they are serving 51 

S lid to he on board of ships not in commission 5 

Deserted 3q 

Invalided 4» 

Drowned, died or killed 7 

Applications unanswered 6 



i8 



Refuted to be 

discharged, 



( Because they bad no documents 107 

Because British subjects 229 

Because their documents were insnffici cnt 183 

Because they had voluntarily enlisted 49 

Because they were not Americans 9 

Because they were deserters 12 

Because taken on board of enemy's privateers 45 
i Because they had fraudulent protections 30 

Did not answer the descriptions in their protec- 
tions 75 
Because married in the United Kingdom 21 
Because ignorant of the United States 5 
Exchanged as British subjects from enemy pri- 
soners g 
Because said to be impostors 6 
Having formerly belonged to the navy 1 
Haying used the sea before beinjr bound i 
Because released from prison at Gottenburgby 
the British consul, to whom they applied for 
protections 3 
Protection irregular, dated May 29, in the Uni- 
ted States and endorsed in London, June 6th 
following 1 
Because natives of the West Indies U 
Do. of Sweden 2 
Do. of Africa 4 
Do of Prussia 1 
Do. of Italy I 
No reason assigned \9 



1558 
I have pissed in review as briefly as possible, all the documents 
on tbe subject of impressments which have come to my hand. It 
is impossible to ascertain the precise number from these compli- 
cated and voluminous reports. But, so far as I have been able te 
collect facts, from the best data to which I had access, the number 
has been much overrated. Let us take the number 6257 for an ex- 
ample. This however is increased by the addition of 200 not pro- 
perly belonging to it, not being included in any ©f Mr. Lyman's 
returns, but consisting of applications made in the first instance to 
the department of 6tate, and which may bave been in whoU or in 
part released on a posterior application. But to make the most of 
that number, I will in the first instance admit the whole. From 
this deduct in the first place, for duplicate, triplicate, and quadru- 
plicate applications, i. e. instances in which the name of the same 
person is numbered from twice to four and five times, 548. It is 
probable that the real number is much greater ; but to that amount 
it is ascertained by indisputable evidence from the documents. Add 
to this 757, being an obvious excess in the enumeration, between 
the reparts of January 1805, and of March 1808. This will leav* 
4?51. I have found 370 instances of imprcaimontt from ships whoit 



i9 

national character is ascertained ; of these I have found l42 , nearly 
3 5ths of the whole to have been from British vessels. It we M 

1 i 5 othlt number, being the amount of Jg-— ^*^Mj 
Swedish and Danish vessels, it w. 1 make ^ fractten ££ ££ 

2 stha It is a fair inference, that where BO mention M made oi cm 
>$?* ^Vessel, na where i~l -™- ^ 

tUn vessels i, in that W^jjt^ftg e" mate the inv 
to impressment. But instead of MB* 1 wtu 
pmUti from British vessels at l 'f » ^"^-.L" and ordered 
Sf 3302. Of this number M« have ^Jjjjff^ Indies, 

in consequence of Mr. 1 }»»«••? acknow i e dged to be British 
On perusing the documents, I find 5 1 8 acltnev ' *» declare d 

.abject.. 568 who had no do cument^ 66 •££«£ ahhoUgh 
to be ^sufficient, 281 « ho had erne ^^ 

they might afterwards - Jrm d»d> arge, the rf 

would nut consider a refusa to .ekaseinem 

195 with protections evident v ^g^2£J in Great Bri- 
neutral aliens or natives . o f tl« West In cs n ^ 

tain 42, prisoners of war 21, making a ^^ ^ ^ 

cess over the number 1778 ol 713. am d have been 

amount 831 the proportion of the.e c a > . « . po-^^ ^ 
impressed from British vessels, n leaves i document. 

It may perhaps be said with truth,that pa . t .of tho» e«rt> se .^ 

Uedeemel insufficient, were real Amenc- , and *** JJ^ ^ 
ought to have been admitted. 1 hw IS P » -> > , dJi 

i. considered that 200 have - rf - > £ d 

not properly belong lo it, a «V^ t ^w^^" » uch «<* ttmCD * 
■It may be all discharged, and that it was detected, while 

as wer'e evidently "^•^^J^^a'^aU^-l 

it was in many instances so ^11 executed ; « han lt 

has been estimated. 1 In* win go •» suonoscd to be among 

Zy number of real Americans who J • «£- fc ., , conu , 
those whose documents weie dcemea ^^ B|—- 

deration farther deserving ^«>^^e*™t instance, ami lb* 
ner in which P««£« £ ff£# docamems already noticed, 
traffic in, as well as »^nes «*« ^ Heam , are red 

it is at least very singular, nat in «■ ^ tQ sUlc 

Americans, neither J^vej «J «• f J J ^ 3Q u t as » 
their places of residence, o '^^ coucl ^\*e than a well attest- 
omit it. No evidence conlu be more "JJ"^ j menlion that 
cd document of this kind, in wo V\ iion n aUC mpt- 

nu .n„,r, because in list, to ft. I a«jo u.t th mto m.^ 
rd to be given, and I suppose is gi e m l2G4 caseJtt 



20 

that the party beloneed to the United S'.ates. a piece of evidence 
pci-ily equivalent to none at all ; for if an attempt is n ade to piove 
a m:n the citizen ol a stale, it must he by pointing out the particu- 
lar place oi town in the state of which he is a nativ.; or an inhabi- 
t r.t Whatever other reasons tliere may be for omitting a puce 
of Information so important to its pbject, I think the most powerful 
o:ie to be that the parties never had any residence in the United 
S ates Upon a view of the whole subject, I think it at least proba- 
ble t liat nearly and perhaps quite as many seamen have been cis- 
charged, as tliere have been impressed of real Americans cut of 
American ships, although they may not be pr* cisely the s^me indi- 
viduals No doubt a pan of those impressed Irona British ships 
ar«' real Americans, and I do not find many instances oi such being 
discharged But if Americana have voluntarily placed themselves 
under the British flat, I see not that their detention ought to be the 
ground of a national quarrel. The idea that any very great num- 
ber ot Meatmen are confined on board of British ships, docs not ap- 
pear to be substantiated by such facts as would be expected was it 
real. Although tve hear of the many thousands of our impressed 
seamen who are Buffering in these floating dungeons or ht lis, as 
they have been called, which have been multiplied to 20, and I be- 
1 eve even to 40 th< usand ; yet come to point out known individuals, 
it i* questionable whether 100 could bu designated b> tl <ii nan i s 
and places of abode. Where do these seamen belong? Do they 
belong to Boston, Salem, Marblehead, Portland, Newport, Provi- 
dence, or to any other pat ts of New England, s\ part of the country 
v hich has pel h* ps furnished more native si amen than all tl e Ustltt d 
States besides ? No. Do they belong to New York New Jersey, 
Philadelphia, Baitimoie, Norfolk, Churlc ston, or to an) other place 
ei her in the soutliei n or mtddh states J Nb. It is vei v qucstiona- 
ble a be ther tnoi e than half a dozen ihdit iduals could be printed out 
in either of those places. Where then in the name of common 
sense do they belong, il they are citizei > of the United States?-** 
We will certainly search in vain for tl.em in Kentucky, Ol io, Ten- 
nessee, or any oi lh< western states or ten in ries. So many details 
maybe considered as dry, and the perusal uninteresting. Under 
difl'cicnt circumstances this would be the case. Few are disposed 
t" examine calculations, where a recourse to figures is necessary. 
But iii our pr< si in situation, involved in a war, which must be dis- 
astrous, and may, in the end. prove ruinous to our best interests, 
on this single point, it is ol importance to investigate facts, and as 
fa i as practicable, ascertain th< magnitude of the evil. Having pro* 
tr..( n d this add i < *s to a mw li greater length than was intenfitd, my 
concluding i eptarks will be but few. It m»y> however be oi in p&r- 
tance to observe, that when we were precipitated into a wai foi the 
commt»ncemeut oi which tlis iras f.«s one-ol the principal 

grounds, and is now the soli cause foi which it is continued, tht i \ il 
was not increasing hut rather diminishirg. Between January l ( J, 
1 B' IS. and Match 6tn I 8' 6 — 36 3 applu iitit t s w ei e c< mmunicated to 
epai i stale, exclusive ol 47 to the a gent at Jamaica. 

Between limi caie, and ilic bccotid of u.c same month 18U8, u l .'7 



21 

applications. From tint date to \pril 5, 1810, no information. From 
thai date to January 19, 1812, '200 applications. That G.eat Biitain 
has refused to release \mericans, known to be such ; unless it be 
in the case of voluntary enlistments, marriage in Great Britain, or 
some other circumstance which is peculiar in their situation, doel 
not appear in evidence. That she is in the habit of transferring 
impressed Americans from ship to ship, if) order that applications 
for their release may be rendered abortive, and all enquiiies .bout 
them fruitless, is shown not to be founded on fact, by the g<eat 
numbers winch she has released from time to time. I have not 
brought into this reckoning those released previous to 1 8 j4, altno' 
the balance detained is brbuglit forward in the reckoning. That 
she lias invariably refused to negotiate on the subject of impress- 
ment, is also assertion without proof. The correspondence be- 
tween Lord Grenville and Mr. King, showed it to be a subject of 
great difficulty and delicacy, but it neither showed an entire disin- 
clination to negotiate, nor gave ground absolutely to despair of 
success. From that time to 1806 I know not that there was any 
sincere attempt to negotiate on the subject. This attempt t*ave no 
ground to despair of success Had the treaty of 1806 been ratified, 
there is little doubt but the informal arrangement connected with 
that instrument would have practically secured to both govern* 
menu every thing to be wished on the subject. That treaty was 
contemptuously sent back by the then chief magistrate, without 
deigning^ to make the experiment, or even to submit it to the Se- 
nate, and one source of all tiie difficulties which have since arisen 
between the two nations, on that and other subjects, may be traced 
to that rash act. Since that period there has been no attempt at 
negotiation on that subject, unless it was coupling it, in a moment 
ot irritation, with the affair of the Chesapeake, which was soon 
abandoned. This not only failed of success, but was a means of 
protracting the settlement of the other difficulty to a much later 
period thari it otherwise would have been. It has since been 
merged in other difficulties, and neither in the t< nders made to the 
different belligerent* during the embargo and non-interceurst, nor 
in the arrangement made with Mr. Erskine in 1809, was the want 
of an express stipulation on the subject of impressment, consider- 
ed as an insurmountable obstacle t« an accommodation. It must 
therefore seem stiange that, w hen the evil it sell is lessened, and every 
other ground of complaint substantially removed, it should stdl be 
considered of such magnitude as to be a sufficient cause lor conti- 
nuing the war. If it be said that the principle it*elf is a sufficient 
cause of war and we ought not to give up the contest before that is 
relinquished Without attempting .<t all to discuss the question about 
the principle I answei that I hare no idea of going to war for an 
abstract principle whether it be right cr wrorlg. A man mav pro« 
f>KSS the principle that he has a right to niv farm, but so long as he 
attempts no practical step, either legal or violent, to establish iiis 
claim 1 will not go to law with him. There have been many hug 
and bloody wsrsbetween Great Britain and France, many ol them 
on grounds sufficiently ridiculous, but I know not that any one war 



22 



w«* for this cause alone, that one of the Kings dJ Great Britain as^ 
turned, and his successors fur several centuries continued to adopt 
the ridiculous title of King of France. Great Britain may claim 
the right of impressing her own subjects from on board of Ame- 
rican vessels, or she may claim if you please, the right ot lm- 
p. easing Americans, which by the way she has never done ; but it is 
only in the practical exercise of that right that it can be a real 
grievance or a cause of war. I have hitherto said nothing about 
the probability of obtaining the object in pursuit bf war. I believe 
there is none. We may take Canada and Nova-Scotia, «nd the I- lo- 
ridaa into the bargain, i. e. if we can obtain then., and affairs on the 
ocean remain m the same state as at present, unless it be by an al- 
teration for the worse. If ever the object is obtained or the dim- 
culty settled it must be bv amicable negotiation. Even alter a war 
of .even years, or a longer period it must come to that at last, and 
whenever a disposition to meet the subject in that way is mutual, 
experience has shewn that, although difficult and dtlicate, it is not 
impracticable. Great Britain has an undoubted claim upon her 
own seamen, and we have no right either to detain or secrete them 
under fictitious protections. They are necessary to her national 
existence and independence. We have a right to have ours guard- 
ed against vexatious impressments. It we wish to secure ours, It 
must be by a readiness to surrender hers, C uocetsiont must be 
Mutual if ever peace and good understanding is to be re-establish, 
eel. It is idle to expect coercion to effect it. If war as well a. 
other great national or individual undertaking, .calculations ueght 
to be made about the probable expense and risk, compared With 
the ol ject to be obtained. The point in view here ,s the securing 
of a right which, in the full e*M et it has been claimed, will ope ate 
indiscriminately in favor ol British and American sa.hvs and it 
uncertain whether it would not prove more injures ^awfe"* 
to our native seamen. As it rejects the expense ot thl war WJ 
have n go.d sample in what ha. already taken place. Should it be 
oominufS another campaign without an, additional «l^»j£ 
has already been authorised, it will, besides »hfUljtt«g1 * ° rdln ^ 
sources of revenue, make an addition ol g 3, ,000,000 to our na- 
tional debt, viz. 27 millions in loans and 10 ^f^^l^ the 
addition to the expense, the prodigal waste «t human 1 lie, and the 
increase of human misery necessarily attendant ^/•^^V" 
he brought into the estimate. Hitherto our ™V^°^™* 
treasure, has not been rewarded by many laurels. These coniutor 
ations have induced me to btlieee, that the tacr utfoudy 

too great For the object to be obtained, and that •J^"*"*^" 

iioneftbewhr, no « when ' principal cause for which it* as 

commenced is removed, in spit. I of defeat, disgrace, *^*"** 
mowing opposition of public s, ntiment against, far « object 
wholly inadequate t<» the sacii6cc to be made, ana 
ever obtained, must be procured in an* he wa >, . m wu, R, • e 
viial intere.lt of the eountr, - hazard without 1 ■ oepec twf any 
.dequate return. On H ■ -unit I hevw ™^&£*^ 



ssful. 



23 

have done my duty. I have taken some pain* to render the above 
statements correct. But, being for a long time unaccustomed to 
figures, it is possible some mistakes may have crept in. I hope 
there are none of moment. Deductions and reasoning* must stand 
or fall by their own merit. Any material error I sltall with plea- 
sure retract when pointed out. A condemnation of the whole in 
bulk without examination, will be suffered to pass unnoticed. — With 
expression of my best wishes for the prosperity and happiness of 
our common country, and with grateful sentiments for the repeated 
marks of approbation given to my feeble, though sincere endeavors 
to discbarge the duties of my station, 

I subscribe, 

Your friend and fellow citizen, 

SAML. TAGGART. 

Waghington> February 17, 1813; 



89 w 




- ' 




o ±*<6u^\ 






% 


^ 


« '* . . -A 





















±v 



A 



I 



'bv 












^ 















^ 



























; 









^ V 











rVf«* s 




